South Korea Lifts Ban on Military Games

South Korea Lifts Ban on Military Games

December 29, 2006
The Korea Times reports that the South Korean government has lifted a ban on certain military games.

In recent times, tites like Ghost Recon 2 and Mercenaries, which dealt with the tense political situation between North and South Korea, have been barred. But Kim Key-man of the Korea Media Rating Board said those restrictions will be relaxed in the interest of freedom of expression.

In the past, North Korea has seized on such game content for propaganda purposes. The Korea Times report cites one such diatribe:
"Through propaganda, entertainment and movies, Americans have shown everyone their hatred for us," North Korea's Tongil newspaper said about Ghost Recon 2. "This may be just a game to them now, but a war will not be a game for them later. In war, they will only face miserable defeat and gruesome deaths."

Source: GameSpot U.K.
Posted in

Comments

Submitted by DoggySpew - December 29, 2006 at 2:50 pm -0500
@Marshie

You are forgetting that a good army does not mean alot of soldiers alone. It also means equipment and deployment options, and of course weaponry. The US have way better equipment, deployment and weaponry.

Fighting a war is something the US is good at. Holding the peace when winning is another thing.

North Korea is not threat.
Submitted by robustyoungsoul - December 29, 2006 at 9:22 am -0500
That's the kind of trash talk you like to hear on XBox Live.
Submitted by Marshie - December 29, 2006 at 9:03 am -0500
“This may be just a game to them now, but a war will not be a game for them later. In war, they will only face miserable defeat and gruesome deaths.”

Holy inflammatory comments, Batman!
Submitted by agro - January 2, 2007 at 8:38 pm -0500
“This may be just a game to them now, but a war will not be a game for them later. In war, they will only face miserable defeat and gruesome deaths.”

Man that is the best thing ever said on the subject of games ever in history.
Submitted by Brokenscope - January 3, 2007 at 12:30 am -0500
It is immpossible to win a war when you put the lives of th enemy before the lives of your own soldiers. To try to minimize civilian deaths is a good thing. You want to be a liberator nor a concquoer. However if you hamstring yourself you are doomed to fight for a long time.
Submitted by Terminator44 - December 29, 2006 at 10:15 am -0500
"In war, they will only face miserable defeat and gruesome deaths.”

Sounds a lot like when Saddam predicted that the Americans would "swim in pools of their own blood" right before the 1991 Gulf War. Boy, he sure hit the nail on the head with that one, didn't he, folks?
Submitted by SpeedySwaf - December 29, 2006 at 10:22 am -0500
A campaign against North Korea would actually be tougher then it was against Saddam on both occassions. Primarily because NK has one of the largest armies in the world, though it's hampered by out-dated equipment and lack of suppies.
Submitted by Terminator44 - December 29, 2006 at 8:47 pm -0500
Whoops, I mean NK in the last sentence.
Submitted by Gray17 - December 29, 2006 at 7:34 pm -0500
Plus in case of a war with North Korea, there's a little matter of none of NK's neighbors liking the place, and the US being on fairly friendly terms with said neighbors. That tends to help in wars.
Submitted by Terminator44 - December 29, 2006 at 6:13 pm -0500
@Marshie and DoggySpew

Exactly. On top of all that, I seem to recall that Iraq previously held the positon of military strength that NK holds today (#4 or 5 in the world) when it went into the Gulf War. However, just like DoggySpew said, that numerical advantage was rendered useless against the U.S.'s superior tatics and technology. Would an operation against NK be tougher? Maybe, if the commanders were smart and the troops at peak form. However, from what I've heard, their soldiers (many of them conscripts) are not that well-trained or disciplined, and their commanding officers aren't much better. Even if that isn't true, America's more advanced air and sea power could easily take out most of the KPA's important positions on the ground, therby weakening and demoralizing them.

And Marshie is correct, we should worry more about China's military. Not only do they have overwhelming numbers, but they are developing modern warfare systems to compete with the rest. Compared to them, NZ is just a bug waiting the be squashed.
Submitted by Wookiee - December 30, 2006 at 5:42 pm -0500
I would like to point out that most American movies try to avoid portraying other countries as the "bad guys". In most of them, the villlian is an evil INDIVIDUAL within the country. (My fave is Braddock: Missing in Action3 with Chuck Norris)

In Ian Flemming's legendary novels, the bad guys were SMERSH and the KGB. In the movie adaptations, they were switched to evil secret societies and terrorist orginizations like SPECTER. This was done to avoid offending the Soviet Union. (One of John F. Kennedy's favorite books was reported to be On Her Majesty's Secret Service.)
Submitted by Marshie - December 29, 2006 at 1:43 pm -0500
@SpeedySwaf

Anybody's going to have a huge army when they have over 1 in 4 citizens in some service in the military. The United States, for reference, has roughly 1 in 100 citizens in some military service.

If anything, I'd be worried about China. They have a standing army of over two million soldiers and only 1 in 200 citizens are enlisted in some form of military service.
Submitted by Grahamr - December 30, 2006 at 12:13 pm -0500
"robustyoungsoul Says:
December 29th, 2006 at 10:22 am
That’s the kind of trash talk you like to hear on XBox Live."

LOL! Nice one.
Submitted by Sergeant S.W. Foster - March 20, 2007 at 1:15 am -0500
Great! Hopefully we can now have some joint training with them in S. Korea. It would be great training and give the North something to contemplate.

Sergeant S.W. Foster
US Army
www.DesertVets.org
www.IraqfromtheWindow.com
www.SgtScorpion.com
Submitted by Mike - December 3, 2007 at 11:19 am -0500
China has 2 million soldiers now (while not at war) - that is indeed impressive.

But remember that toward the end of World War II in 1945, Hitler still had many millions of soldiers in the field. Did not help/save him.

Also, the Russians lost literally 20 million soldiers against the Germans alone.

Numbers are less important in modern warfare (WWII - present).

Screw NK, they are a joke and if we can take out *truly* bad-ass armies (like Germany's and Japan's), they are fucking dreaming thinking they can hold their own with our military (or the UK's for that matter).

I mean, did they forget the Koren War? We are the reason their nation is divided into North & South. NK is fascist.
Submitted by Natasha Yi - December 13, 2007 at 4:41 am -0500
Hello webmaster.... i was searching for korea and i came across your post and it is definitely the most sensible thing i have seen in a long time, and in my opinion you got something good going here, i have to get my friends to subscribe to your post about South Korea Lifts Ban on Military Games.

Post new comment

By posting comments on this Web site you agree to abide by the Comments Policy.
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This image is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. The letters in the picture are all UPPER-CASE.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 07/24/08 at 07:39am
sortableturnip: Best...comments...ever: http://jaablog.jaablaw.com/2008/07/06/jack-needs-your-help.aspx?pg=5&view=threaded
Posted 07/24/08 at 05:42am
sortableturnip: Alteffor: I 2nd that motion. GP you should have a special section for all of JT's correspondence to you
Posted 07/23/08 at 10:13pm
GRIZZAM PRIME: Lunatic: Nope. Ever fading if I'm not mistaken.
Posted 07/23/08 at 08:05pm
LuNaTiC: is there a way to view old shouts? sorry if its a noob question.
Posted 07/23/08 at 07:07pm
gamepolitics: momma didn't raise no sock puppet
Posted 07/23/08 at 06:15pm
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: Jack is a repressed man. Don´t be surprised...
Posted 07/23/08 at 06:07pm
GryphonOsiris: So Jack admitted paying for gay porn... all I can say is wow... just wow...
Posted 07/23/08 at 05:09pm
lumi: to the case, and he's been on 60 minutes once!
Posted 07/23/08 at 05:09pm
lumi: GP, you should mention you'll be filing a legal injunction against him if he doesn't comply. Phoenix Wright will be attached
Posted 07/23/08 at 03:32pm
Alteffor: You should add a section to the site for anything Jack CC's to you. It's always entertaining to read the stuff he writes.
Posted 07/23/08 at 03:31pm
Matriculated: Does anyone know when the Supreme Court reaches their decission?
Posted 07/23/08 at 03:04pm
Freyar: I demand to see this letter! (Not that I have any grounds to demand on.)
Posted 07/23/08 at 02:53pm
gamepolitics: JT called me a "sock puppet" in an e-mail to Hal Halpin... i gave him 24 hours to retract it, LOL
Posted 07/23/08 at 02:46pm
Haggard: Might want to take a look at what Anthony Horowitz wrote about GTA IV in the Telegraph, article seems to have been taken down
Posted 07/23/08 at 01:05pm
Silencets: Beutiful. I always did wonder about Jacko Wacko
Posted 07/23/08 at 10:24am
Matriculated: So Jack (an anti-gay activist) PAYED for gay porn
Posted 07/23/08 at 10:22am
Matriculated: [i]...and purchased membership.[/i]
Posted 07/23/08 at 10:21am
Matriculated: [i] few months later, as part of his ongoing campaign against Kent, Thompson followed links to gay porn on Kent's website[/i]
Posted 07/23/08 at 07:40am
sortableturnip: Jack's at it again: http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2008/07/jack_thompson_faces_permanent.php
Posted 07/22/08 at 11:22pm
PHOENIXZERO: Ugh, that CNBC program "Play to Win" is it? Is on again...
Login or register to post shouts